-LRB- CNN -RRB- The case of a Georgia woman , whose execution was postponed for a second time Monday , is once again shining the national spotlight on one of the most fundamental questions we as a nation face : When do we put our own citizens to death ?

But it 's an issue on which this country is all over the place .

`` As it relates to crimes against individuals ... the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim 's life was not taken . '' That was Justice Anthony Kennedy , writing for the majority in Kennedy v. Louisiana -LRB- 2008 -RRB- .

You might think at first the Department of Justice is n't listening .

After all , the U.S. federal government lists dozens of capital offenses that are punishable by death , and not all of them involve a victim 's life being taken . They fall into three main categories : 1 -RRB- homicide offenses ; 2 -RRB- espionage and treason ; and 3 -RRB- nonhomicidal narcotics offenses . While most of them involve the death of a victim , not all of them do .

But what happened to all that `` should n't expand death penalty to crimes where the victim 's life was not taken '' language from the Supreme Court ? Does n't the Department of Justice have to listen to the Supreme Court ?

They do , and they have .

The Department of Justice has read the high court 's fine print in Kennedy v. Louisiana : `` Our concern here is limited to crimes against individual persons . We do not address , for example , crimes defining and punishing treason , espionage , terrorism , and drug kingpin activity , which are offenses against the State . As it relates to crimes against individuals , though , the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim 's life was not taken . ''

Ah . As with most things , there are exceptions to the rule -- though reasonable minds may differ on the reasoning behind those exceptions .

Apparently , when we are talking about crimes against people , the death penalty should not be expanded to nonhomicide-type crimes . If it 's a crime against the state , well , it 's game on .

After all , treason is one of three crimes mentioned in the U.S. Constitution , so there 's a good argument that the federal statute authorizing death for treason is `` constitutional '' -- because it 's actually in the constitution . -LRB- Yet another reason why federal court is not a place where defendants want to be -- it 's no secret defense attorneys would rather be in state court , where the penalties are less severe and where everything is n't illegal -RRB- .

While it varies from state to state , as a very general proposition , the death penalty is almost universally reserved for the crime of murder . Murder is a subcategory of the broader class of homicide , and death penalty crimes are normally a subcategory of murder .

As another very general proposition in the States , murder -- plus something on top that makes it more egregious -- is what will qualify as a capital crime .

It would be nice to say that capital murder in the states is always defined as an intentional killing , but even that has exceptions . In fact , in some states , you can be executed for a victim 's death even if you did n't actually pull the trigger and even if you never intended a death to result .

If you commit an inherently dangerous felony , and a death results , you can be charged with `` felony murder , '' which in some states qualifies you for the death penalty . According to the Supreme Court , this is constitutional , as long as the defendant significantly participated in the felony and was recklessly indifferent to human life .

Ultimately , it 's nearly impossible to articulate a simple rule for determining which crimes our society deems worthy of the death penalty . Society 's view of the death penalty is constantly evolving , and so is the view of appropriate death penalty crimes .

As a general rule , horrific murders qualify , but sometimes a nonhomicide crime such as espionage qualifies . If you are in the armed forces , even more crimes can get you executed , such as desertion .

That 's particularly paradoxical that we might order our military personnel to intentionally kill in times of war and then execute them -- as was the case of Pvt. Eddie Slovik -- for refusing to intentionally participate in the killing . Of course , we have long recognized that military justice requires a degree of martial discipline that the civilian world simply does n't .

While the husband-wife execution of convicted spies -LRB- and nonkillers -RRB- Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were certainly high profile at the time , the modern reality is that every person executed since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976 participated in a crime in which a victim died .

So what exactly will earn you the death penalty ? The message is anything but clear .

For crimes against the person , it has to be pretty awful : A killing plus something that makes it even worse than your garden variety homicide . If your crime is against the state , however , the Supreme Court will give the state some leeway in killing citizens .

@highlight

U.S. federal government lists dozens of capital offenses punishable by death

@highlight

Danny Cevallos : Society 's view of death penalty is constantly evolving